Drew Brees, not Peyton Manning, displayed the poise and leadership of a Super Bowl champion Sunday night in Miami, leading his New Orleans Saints to their first Vince Lombardi trophy.
Brees completed 32 of 39 for 288 yards and two scores, winning the MVP trophy in the meantime.
His career is far from over and he’s got a lot more history to write in the years ahead. But I asked the question two weeks ago – will Drew Brees make the Hall of Fame? His last four seasons have certainly been trending in that direction.
Super Bowl performances like the show he put on tonight certainly won’t hurt his cause. Sure, it took Tracy Porter’s pick of Manning late in the game to seal the deal. And Sean Payton’s onside kick was a gutty call. But Brees’ performance was nearly flawless. My guess is he leads the Saints to many more playoff victories over the next few years as well.
If he does it’d be hard to keep him out of Canton in a decade, give or take a year or two.
Loading ...
Drew is a HOFer now unless he gets fat and happy and moves to the French Quarter than gets the “yips like a golfer and can’t throw the ball on target anymore. That’s not going to happen!! LOL!!
The way his career has ascended is impressive and added to his storylines should garner a lot of support from the voter. He’s a good story. Maybe even more impressive than the guy who bagged groceries and played Arena football. He might of just bumped Mr. Warner to the back of bus that’s going to Canton.
Brees doesn’t have a strong arm. He’s a very smart QB. Reminds me of a guy in Miami the went to 3 straight SB’s. If Drew’s team doesn’t get too sidetracked he can do this SB thing again. How many top notch QB’s are in the NFC? Should be Saints and Cowboys duking it out.
I just had a thought :) Phil Simms. Every bit the QB as Brees who had a similiar SB winning game and he’s not in the HOF yet. Really amazing to me.
Nah, Phil Simms’s regular season stats appear to be at Hall of the Very Good level, and he doesn’t have enough rings to boost him over the top. Same with Boomer Esiason and Joe Theismann, with even less postseason success. No surprise to me there.
I think it’s too early to say on Brees just yet.
I agree with the level you put Boomer Esiason on but I think Simms will be in the HOF some day. As for Theismann he has a real good shot. I see nothing holding them back.
Simm’s and Theismann’s stats won’t be as great because of their team’s philosophy of a balanced offense. They were very good running teams. The stat I like to look at for these guys is their win – loss records and their TD’s – Int rate. Than finally were they able to lead their teams to Super Bowl success. I think they did enough in all areas.
Simms has a 95-64 win – loss record with 199 TDs and 157 Ints. Theismann has a 77-44 win-loss record and 160 TDs and 138 Ints . These numbers look awful impressive too me. Simms had a 6-4 Playoff record and a very impressive Super Bowl win. Very likely would of had another SB appearance if not for injury. Theismann was 6-3 in playoffs with back to back SB appearances with a win over my Dolphins. errr
Sorry Tony but those numbers for Simms and Theismann are not awfully impressive and there is certainly enough doubt to hold them back. Neither one is getting as far as the Last 25 for the HOF vote and really when you look at the backlog being created and the names to be added for eligibility in the next decade neither one has any chance unless they take the Seniors route. Simms, Theismann and Esiason are all comfortably a level below what is required for Canton.
Brees on the other hand is well on his way. He’s already over the 30,000yd and 200 TD threshold and his last 4 seasons with the Saints have been sensational. Don’t forget his last two seasons in San Diego were pretty good too including a 104.8 rating and 27-7 Td to Int ratio in 2004. Brees had a 51-22 ratio and 96.1 rating those last two seasons with the Chargers.
30,000yds/200 TD club
91.9 career passer rating
4 straight 4,000 yd seasons including a 5k season
3 All-Pros (1 1st team)
Offensive Player of the Year 2008
NFL record 70.6 completion % in 2009
Led NFL twice in passing yards and twice in TD passes.
Super Bowl title
Super Bowl MVP.
That looks like a HOF QB resume and he is still in his prime. Another 4 seasons or so of 4,000 yds and 25 TDs+ is certainly achievable. Brees should finish his career with at least 50,000 yds and 300 TDs like Elway did provided he stays healthy and motivated. In fact if his next 4 seasons are as good as the last 4 then Brees will have 49,000 yds and 322 TDs by the time he is 35.
What about these numbers win-loss 92-56-3 with 192 TD’s and 172 Ints. with 22 TD’s and 2473 yds for a season highs in his career ? And a 6-5 playoff record. Does the fact that this QB never even approached 3,000 yds in a season let alone the 4000 or 5000 yds Brees does routinelty mean that he’s a better QB and more deserving of the HOF?
The game has changed a lot!! The above stats are from a HOFer who played in a balanced offense like the Redskins and Giants. His numbers are similiar to Simms. Both one a lot of games for their teams. QB’s are generally allowed to open up the game more now than ever before.
I would never compare the stats of an excellent QB from a generation ago to today’s pass happy dink and dunk offenses with Gazelle like WR’s who carry the rock for huge yards.
Simms was a great QB ! He was nearly murdered his first few years in the league. You can’t under estimate his courage and leadership. I never said when he would be elected into the HOF but it will happen. Theismann could make it but he’s not very likeable so that may hurt him.
Bob Griese played in the dead ball era of the 1970s and was an (8/2) with two Super Bowls compared to Simms’ (2/0). Don’t get me wrong Simms was a very good QB but he’s a notch below what is required for Canton. The committee must agree as he’s never gone beyond the preliminary candidate list and reached the Last 25 list.
Please will someone other than boknows34 tell me what the #$%! “dead ball era” means without researching the term?
I’ve never heard any reputable football person or literature using that term in all my years as a football fan. It’s a term taken from baseball by some idiot blogger who wants to makeup #$@! to describe a period of time and the worst thing is they’re trying to describe something unusual that isn’t even true.
This is the definition from the website “Cold, Hard, Football Facts” which not at all a serious source of football information. They put out misinformation and apparently people believe it’s true.
Dead Ball Era – The period in NFL history (1966-77) that was ruled by low scores and stifling defensive play. Many of the most famous defenses of modern NFL history – Pittsburgh’s Steel Curtain, Dallas’ Doomsday Defense, Minnesota’s Purple People Eaters and the Rams’ Fearsome Foursome – all played in the Dead Ball Era. The Dead Ball Era reached its oppressive peak in its final year: the 1977 season featured both the stingiest scoring defense and most inept scoring offense in modern NFL history.
There were great Defenses and they were getting a little bit of the upper hand but to say it was an era with the “most inept scoring offenses in modern NFL history” is ludercris. Really a big lie because they paint an era with a broad brush because of some great Defenses in the League. That was only a few teams.
You only need to look at the Team Offensive output from the so-called Dead Ball Era 1966-77 in the NFL = 19.9 pts per game and 293.4 yds per game compared to smack in the middle of the modern era 1990-01 = 20.2 pts per game and 314.7 yds per game. 20 more yards from 7 more passes a game.
The comparison shows that even for all the changes in rules and player’s abilities the offensive output hasn’t changed much over the years. Today’s teams average about 7-8 more pass attempts per game but 6-7 less rushes per game. The real difference IMO are the types plays that are called and when they are called. It’s still hard to score for most teams.
As for the QB’s there were some very good ones but for a few years there was a little bit of a drought as the biggest names like Starr, Dawson, Unitas, Jurgenson, Merideth, Gabriel, Brodie had mixed results as they approach retirement. Griese was consistantly the best in the AFC and Tarkington, Staubach and Kilmer were the NFC’s best so Griese got sort of lucky in competing for Pro Bowls. Namath was still revered but riddled with bad knees, Bradshaw took awhile get his head out of his rear, Stabler was coming into his own by 1974, Spurrier was a Heisman disappointment, Fouts was struggling with a bad team, Plunkett appeared to be a bust , Anderson showed signs of greatness and Bert Jones exploded on the scene. The 1970’s weren’t exactly the baron landscape that they discribed above. I don’t know if there’s ever more than 6-8 really good QB’s playing at a time anyway.
Tony P
Relax. I have no interest in getting into a heated slanging match with you. I was merely pointing out Griese was a far more decorated QB than Simms (8/2 to 2/0) and played in a much tougher era for passing – hence why Griese is in the HOF and Simms is not. Griese’s raw stats don’t look that great by today’s standards but they were better in comparison to other QBs during his era than Simms’ numbers in comparison to his QB rivals during the 80’s/early 90’s.
It was only from 1978 where the NFL introduced new rules to open up the passing game that we saw a big shift in balance and passing numbers began to shoot up. If you think Simms should be in the HOF who are you going to leave out? Only a max of 5 modern era names get elected each year so if you compile a list of all the candidates each year can you honestly say Simms is a viable Top 5 player among them? Top 10? Top 15 even? Don’t get me wrong I think there have been too many borderline names getting elected recently but Simms would just be another.
The numbers you gave also don’t explain how those yards and points came about. In 1972, Miami’s perfect season, NFL teams threw the ball on average for 152.1 yds per game and 139.4 yds rushing. Passing yardage was therefore just 52.18% of all yardage gained. There were just 24.8 pass attempts per game compared to 33.7 attempts rushing.
By 1986, the Giants first Super Bowl title with Simms at QB, NFL teams threw the ball on average for 205.5 yds per game and 118.7 yds rushing. Passing yardage was now 63.4% of all yardage gained. There were now 32.3 pass attempts per game compared to 30.2 att rushing.
Quite clearly there was a huge shift from the 1970s to the 1980s. In 1978 the rule changes had a profound effect on the NFL. They included:
1. To open up the passing game, defenders are permitted to make contact with receivers only to a point of five yards beyond the line of scrimmage. Previously, contact was allowed anywhere on the field. This is usually referred to as the “Mel Blount Rule”
2. The pass blocking rules were extended to permit extended arms and open hands.
IMO Brees has a better chance than Simms for Canton not just because his raw stats are better. That would be silly as passing numbers have clearly taken another huge leap forward with further rule changes since Simms retired. I just feel Brees is held in higher regard as a QB during his era compared to Simms. He’s clearly been elite for at least 4 seasons, and had two good/very good seasons in San Diego too. I just never felt with Simms that he was truly elite. Of course he was also overshadowed by HOFers Montana, Marino, Elway, Fouts, Kelly and then Aikman. I just don’t think he was ever really considered in that true upper echelon of QBs.
Brees is already a 4/1 with 2 further 2nd team All Pros, an Offensive Player of the Year award and is coming off 4 brilliant seasons while still in his prime. I would have liked Simms’ chances more and I think he would have gathered much more support for Canton had he been the Giants starting QB in 1990 and not Hostetler during that Super Bowl run. He can count himself unlucky in that regard.
Brees is also clearly the best player on the Saints roster and the face of the franchise while Simms was overshadowed by the likes of Taylor and Carson. When I think of the Saints today I think of great passing and Brees’ brilliance. When I think of the 80’s Giants I think of a great defense and a very good running game. Maybe Simms is also unlucky in that his candidacy coincides with an era where there is an ever increasing backlog of deserving players.
boknows34.
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.” Twain
You rely too much on statistics to make your points. Statistics are lies because nearly always you can cherry pick them to make YOUR argument. I also think “Global Warming” is crap! LOL!!
If your saying there was a shift within the game I’d go for that but not a profound change to the game of football. I wouldn’t look at the peripheral stuff but would rather look at points and yards per game. I’ve shown you that the effects are minimal. The bottom line is that Defensive athletism has kept up with the advantages given to the Offensive players over the years.
I don’t remember Bob Griese having trouble throwing. Not sure what you mean by tougher? If you mean QB stats weren’t as good because pass rushes were more intense, QB’s threw downfield more often and their WR’s weren’t as skilled you’d be right. Speaking of skilled WR’s, do remember all the great ones Simms had? :) Bravaro and who? Back to Griese, for a good chunk of his career opponents expected Csonka, Kiick or Morris to run the ball. Hell of a luxury to use HOFer Warfield as a decoy. When he did use him it was like taking candy from a baby.
Good point about Simms and not winning the 1990 SB. Too bad it would take that, he only led his team to 12 or 13 wins during that season. Plunkett is the only multiple SB winner not in the HOF. Too bad people don’t trust their eyes more and stats less than he’d be at least in the HOF discussion.
I like Brees’s HOF chances. I support Westlaker’s. :)
I have not cherrypicked any stats. When you gave stats to support a debate are they cherrypicked too or is it only the ones you disagree with? Remember to take your own advice that you gave to someone else on another thread here where you said: ‘Can’t someone have a different opinion from yours without being stoned?’ :)
You have merely given total yardages for both eras without asking how that yardage was actually gained which was what I was looking at with the run/pass %. Its one thing to scratch the surface but I would rather delve a bit deeper and clearly the NFL Simms knew was quite a bit different to the one Griese knew just a decade before.
What I mean by tougher is that the rules during Griese’s era restricted the passing game to the extent it allowed defenses to get away with much more than Simms ever experienced. What was legal then for defensive backs covering receivers was illegal after 1978. Offensive Linemen were also not allowed to pass block with extended arms and open hands making it easier for that intense pass rush you mention to put added pressure on the QB and therefore more likely to force turnovers.
However, I would agree Griese didn’t necessarily find it as tough throwing the ball as the WRs who were virtually getting mugged trying to catch it. And I would agree that passer ratings and completion % were to an extent lower and interceptions were higher due to a greater emphasis on the long pass during the 70s. Had Simms played under pre 1978 rules his numbers would undoubtedly take a hit so I think its slightly unfair to directly compare Griese’s numbers with Simms’ which is what you were doing on your post dated Feb 13th. I prefer to compare Griese to Stabler, Staubach and Bradshaw instead as they were on a level playing field.
I do trust my eyes and for me Simms was not a HOFer. He does not pass my personal eyeball test but admit he will for others and is close enough to deserve discussion. I would not entirely be surprised if he gets elected some day as a Senior. I just think he’s got zero chance as a modern era candidate as he’s in direct competion with other HOF nominees to make the cut to the Final 5. At least as a Senior he would be fast-tracked to the final vote and aim for that 80% Yes.
Simms didn’t have great WRs so I’m with you on that one. I was also a big fan of Bavaro. Plunkett, even as a Raider fan, was not a HOFer either. His body of work was nowhere near enough. Do we forget how awful his career was before the Raiders? Stabler deserves it more.
boknows34,
Relax. You’re not being stoned. :) I haven’t called you any bad names. Yet! Lol!
I think I welcome other opinions about as much as you seem to mine. I’ve been on here for over a year and haven’t had issues with others. Some I agree with and some not. Like most folks there are certian areas of the game I’m more passoniate about. For me it’s the 1970’s , the Miami Dolphins (favorite team) and Oilers – Cowboys because I saw so many of their games because of where I live.
For many of these players there are no correct answers. As much as we want stats to resolve the debate there will always be a few players that don’t seem to add up that get in. Just because I haven’t written about every statistic doesn’t mean I haven’t considered them in forming an opinion but I wouldn’t rule out a player based on a whole line of stats without seriously considering the player’s play on the field.
Curious, do you consider football statistics as important as baseball when evaluating players for the HOF?
Can we agree that we need to get off the personal debate and back to the site topics? I never disagreed with your opinion of Drew Brees and your opinion about Simms is a fair one.
Tony.
I would not consider football stats as important as baseball when evaluating baseball. In baseball its more of a 1-on-1 battle between batter and pitcher. Football requires more of a total team effort for everything to click imo. There are so many other factors to considered: were they considered as elite during the era they played, did the team he played for and the quality of the players around him make him look better (Aikman for example) or worse (Floyd Little perhaps) than his true talent. High peak performaces/consistency. Postseason honours (MVPs and Off/Def Player of the Year) and All Pro awards (not so much Pro Bowls) as well as the eyeball test. Stats are important but not the be all and end all. They should be used to support an argument rather than be the entire argument.
Edit: should read ‘when evaluating players for the HOF’ not ‘when evaluating baseball’.
Yup. Baseball is pretty cut and dry. A 1st baseman can’t be a great player with a career batting average of .220 and I don’t care how it’s spun. No eyeball test required! Although .220 would of been good for Reggie Jackson in a couple of his years.
Football is so subjective. Players A and B can both have 4.0 averages rushing the ball and one guy can think player A was great and the other think he was just average. RB John Riggins for example I believe had the lowest career average (or one of) for a HOFer at 3.9 until Floyd Little was elected. Riggins also only went to 1 Pro Bowl. Basically he scored a lot of goal line TD’s and lasted a long time. I’m not saying he doesn’t deserve the HOF but if you never saw him it would be hard to really appreciate the type of runner he was. Very good but HOF?